Cited by 192Ethics in Clinical ResearchSurvey Methodology and NonresponseQualitative Research Methods and Ethics

Recruitment and retention strategies in longitudinal clinical studies with low-income populations

Open access
Nicholson, Lisa M., Schwirian, Patricia M., Klein, Elizabeth G., Skybo, Theresa, Murray-Johnson, Lisa, Eneli, Ihuoma, Boettner, Bethany, French, Gina M. +1 more·2011·Contemporary Clinical Trials

Abstract

Background Conducting longitudinal research studies with low-income and/or minority participants present a unique set of challenges and opportunities.Purpose To outline the specific strategies employed to successfully recruit and retain participants in a longitudinal study of nutritional anticipatory guidance during early childhood, conducted with a low-income, ethnically diverse, urban population of mothers.Methods We describe recruitment and retention efforts made by the research team for the 'MOMS' Study (Making Our Mealtimes Special). The 'multilayered' approach for recruitment and retention included commitment of research leadership, piloting procedures, frequent team reporting, emphasis on participant convenience, incentives, frequent contact with participants, expanded budget, clinical staff buy-in, a dedicated phone line, and the use of research project branding and logos.Results Barriers to enrollment were not encountered in this project, despite recruiting from a low-income population with a large proportion of African-American families. Process evaluation with clinic staff demonstrated the perception of the MOMS staff was very positive. Participant retention rate was 75% and 64% at 6 months and 12 months post-recruitment, respectively. We attribute retention success largely to a coordinated effort between the research team and the infrastructure support at the clinical sites, as well as project branding and a dedicated phone line.Conclusions Successful participant recruitment and retention approaches need to be specific and consistent with clinical staff buy in throughout the project.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cct.2011.01.007

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A predominance of mothers were included due to self-selection bias, consistent with previous education studies, and the study faced difficulties recruiting lower-income families.

    “Consistent with previous education studies, a predominance of mothers were included due to self-selection bias [51, 66], and we faced difficulties recruiting lower-income families [56].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [24]Rosal MC White MJ Borg A Translational research at community health centers: Challenges and successes in recruiting and retaining low-income Latino patients with type 2 diabetes into a randomized clinical trial The Diabetes Educator 2010 36 5 733 49 20729512

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nicholson, L. M., Schwirian, P. M., Klein, E. G., Skybo, T., Murray-Johnson, L., Eneli, I., Boettner, B., French, G. M., & Groner, J. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
  • Mount Carmel College of Nursing (US)
  • Nationwide Children's Hospital (US)
  • University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US)
Corresponding author
Nicholson, Lisa M.
Venue
Contemporary Clinical Trials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-05
Volume
32
Issue
3
Pages
353-362
ISSN
1551-7144 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1986799477
Cited by
192
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 8
FWCI
9.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Contemporary Clinical Trials (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R21HD050944, R21-HD50944)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Keywords
participant recruitment, participant retention, low-income populations, minority groups, early childhood, mothers, African American families, research incentives, project branding, process evaluation
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Attitude of Health Personnel, Child, Child, Preschool, Communication, Diet, Ethnicity, Female, Health Education, Health Promotion, Humans, Infant, Longitudinal Studies, Marketing of Health Services, Mothers, Obesity, Ohio, Patient Dropouts, Poverty, Research Personnel, Urban Population, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Patient Selection, Researcher-Subject Relations, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review